Syndication Feeds

I have written that being without a car in Los Angles is akin to an “existential crisis.” Well, now I have learned that going without one’s computer in contemporary American society is also such a “crisis.”

In a moment of delightful synchronicity, my computer crashed immediately after I had printed – and backed up – my final two papers for the Master’s part of my program in Mythological Studies. That is, it remained functional as long as I absolutely needed it in order to complete the work I had to get done.

As I was about to set out for a party, I realized I had printed out the directions to get there, but not the address of the celebration, so I attempted to turn my computer back on. It kept giving me a message that I needed to turn the computer on. I thought the problem was a temporary glitch, so tried to turn it on when I got up to the hotel in Carpinteria (where I stay during class sessions), but no luck.

I would not learn that my hard-drive had crashed until I took my laptop into the Apple Store on Thursday. I had to take it to another computer store to get it fixed – and where I could also rent a computer (the one from which I write this post).

It has been weird not having regular access to a computer. I didn’t realize (until I went without) how frequently I would check my e-mail – and the Internet. Not only that, I began to realize how much stuff I had stored on my laptop. While I had backed a lot of it up, I hadn’t backed up much in the past few weeks. And anyway, without a computer, I couldn’t read the disks where I had backed things up.

I didn’t have access to friends’ phone numbers, addresses, dates and times of upcoming events. Not only that I had saved notes, ideas for blog posts, ideas for screenplays, notes on movies – and, most importantly, notes for my Fantasy Epic on my hard drive. I realized that it was worth my while to pay to try to get them to restore my hard-drive. Now I need to learn how to better back things up. And to do so on a regular basis.

The one thing that struck me about the whole experience was how fortunate I was. It seemed that someone was looking out for me. As I noted above, my computer only crashed after I had printed out my papers. I had observed some strange things going on with my computer as I was finishing them up, things which seem to be related to the ultimate failure of the hard drive. And yet the computer held up long enough for me to complete the work I needed to finish. It seemed a good sign.

Another great ad from Progress For America. If only more Democrats trusted the troops and didn’t view World War III as a “law enforcement action.” After all, Bill Clinton at least admitted to Chris Wallace that the liberal way of fighting terror before 9/11 had “failed”.

The Democratic opponent of Rep. Mark Foley (R-Fla.) is calling for an investigation into an e-mail exchange that Foley conducted last year with a 16-year-old boy who had worked as a congressional page.

Foley, 52, has served in the House for six terms and is seeking reelection. He said that the five e-mails he wrote to the boy were harmless and that their publication is part of an attempt by Democrats to smear him.

In the brief but chatty e-mails, which were first reported by ABC News, Foley asked how old the boy was, inquired what he wanted for his birthday, requested a picture of the young man and told him that he had just finished a long bike ride and was going to the gym.

According to ABC, the boy forwarded the e-mail that requested his picture to an unidentified congressional staffer and wrote that the e-mail was “sick sick sick sick sick.” In another e-mail to a staffer, ABC reported, the boy wrote: “Maybe it is just me being paranoid, but seriously. This freaked me out.”

I was going to wait to see how this turned out before blogging on it. But with reports coming out now about a resignation, I figured it was time to post on this.

First, in the interest of full disclosure, I would like to state that I have personally contributed to Rep. Foley’s House campaigns and his abandoned US Senate race. I was friends with a number of his Congressional staff when I lived and worked in the DC metro area. And I interacted with Rep. Foley on several occasions at business-related social functions and official meetings. He was always a gentleman and one of the more knowledgeable Members of Congress I had ever met.

That being said, three immediate thoughts came to my mind when I first read this story earlier today:

First — a 16-year old!?!? I just don’t get that!!!

Second — Think a long, long time before you put stuff in email. It never goes away and travels all around the world.

Third – Foley will be lynched, while Rep. Barney Frank (D-MA) was given a pass for having his call-boy boyfriend running a prostitution ring out of Frank’s townhouse and he has won re-election ever since.

Aside from that, I am interested in seeing how the facts play out before casting judgment on anyone involved.

Hours earlier, ABC News had read excerpts of instant messages provided by former male pages who said the congressman, under the AOL Instant Messenger screen name Maf54, made repeated references to sexual organs and acts.

In a statement, Foley said, “I am deeply sorry and I apologize for letting down my family and the people of Florida I have had the privilege to represent.”

**9PM UPDATE** – There is an obsession by some commenters as to why I never “outed” Mark Foley if I knew he was gay, assuming I did.

Unlike Liberals, I do not believe that being gay and Republican is a crime. In fact, I don’t think it is a crime to be gay with any political persuasion. Those on the Left obviously disagree since they are obsessed with “outing” people.

But my question is, why did the St. Petersburg Times not expose Foley as a possible child sex predator if they had the story last November?

Efforts to reach the boy were unsuccessful, but he told the St. Petersburg Times last November, “I thought it was very inappropriate. After the one about the picture, I decided to stop e-mailing him back.” The Times didn’t publish the comments until Friday.

What responsibility does the St. Petersburg Times have to expose allegations of a very serious crime when they become aware of it….versus sitting on it until Election time? It really makes me wonder what they were thinking. Tom Bevan of RealClearPolitics agrees with me.

So if the St. Pete Times could have nailed the story down a long time ago and didn’t, that leads us to two fairly divergent pieces of speculation: Was the paper planning on springing the story closer to the election and got scooped by CREW and ABC News? Or was the paper deliberately ignoring the story in an effort to cover for Foley? Neither seems all that likely to me, so I’m at a loss as to what motivated the St. Petersburg Times to keep a lid on this story for the better part of a year.

Democrats are citing the intelligence estimate as proof that Iraq has been a catastrophe. Those among them who prophesied four years ago that an invasion would provide new recruits for al-Qaeda’s cause can justifiably claim some vindication. But the report also poses problems for Democratic leaders such as House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (Calif.) and Sen. John F. Kerry (Mass.), who say the solution in Iraq is an early withdrawal of U.S. troops. The report supports Mr. Bush’s contention that Iraq is now a central front in the war on terrorism; it says “perceived jihadist success there would inspire more fighters to continue the struggle elsewhere,” while defeat would mean that “fewer fighters will be inspired to carry on the fight.”

The larger thrust of the report goes well beyond Iraq or the cacophony of the midterm election campaign. It says “the most powerful weapon in the war on terror” over time will be not military success in Iraq or the capturing and killing of al-Qaeda leaders, but “the Muslim mainstream.” The vast majority of Muslims are likely to reject the extreme political solutions proposed by al-Qaeda and its allies, and they will be more likely to do so if “democratic reform efforts in Muslim-majority nations progress” and entrenched problems of “corruption, injustice, and fear of Western domination” are alleviated.

The U.S. mission in Iraq since the overthrow of Saddam Hussein has been largely aimed at those goals, in one of the Muslim world’s most important countries. It should be little wonder that the effort, like U.S. promotion of democracy in Lebanon and within the Palestinian Authority, has provoked an extremist backlash. Were it to retreat altogether from the Middle East, the United States could probably reduce the number of Islamic extremist recruits in the next five years. Yet any careful reader of the intelligence estimate will find it hard to conclude that the war can be won that way.

The Surrendercrats are smacked upside the head by one of their own. Gotta love it.

Log Cabin calls on six Senate Democrats to allow reauthorization of the Ryan White CARE Act. “Failure to pass this law by October 1st will have a devastating impact on tens of thousands of people with HIV/AIDS,” said Log Cabin Executive Vice President Patrick Sammon.

“Senator Clinton and her five democratic colleagues should stop playing politics with this life-saving program.” Six Democratic Senators are using a procedural maneuver to block the CARE Act’s reauthorization. The Senators blocking the bill include Sen. Hillary Clinton, Sen. Chuck Schumer, Sen. Mark Dayton, Sen. Bob Menendez, Sen. John Corzine and Sen. Barbara Boxer. “It’s time for these Senators put the national interest above local special interests,” said Sammon.

The Ryan White CARE Act is the principal federal program that provides assistance to Americans infected with HIV/AIDS. Senators and House members from both parties have developed a bipartisan compromise to update the program with reforms that reflect changes in the epidemic. There’s near unanimous agreement that this bill should be passed. While the changes in the proposed bill will lead to small reductions in certain states, many other states with critical funding shortages will benefit from the new law.

“In total, this bill is in the best interest of our nation and those suffering from HIV/AIDS,” said Sammon. “Now is the time for action.” U.S. Senator Mike Enzi (R-WY), Chairman of the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions (HELP) Committee said, “An agreement must be reached.

If the bill is not reauthorized by September 30, several states including California, Massachusetts, Maryland, Illinois, and the District of Columbia would receive drastic reductions in funding and the program that people infected with HIV and AIDS rely on for drugs and other services will not be able to provide them with the treatment they desperately need.” Nearly all Senate Democrats agree this bill must be passed.

Senator Ted Kennedy (D-MA), the ranking member of the HELP committee with Sen. Enzi said in a statement on Tuesday, “There are few more urgent responsibilities for Congress this week than to pass this bipartisan legislation.” While Log Cabin supports reauthorization, we understand this isn’t a perfect bill. During the appropriations process, lawmakers will need to provide at least a $55 million increase to the AIDS Drug Assistance Programs (ADAP).

“Flat funding ADAP will create additional stress on a program that is already stretched too thin,” said Sammon.

Maybe with the Massachusetts Liberal Guerriero no longer steering the ship, Log Cabin can start to become the organization it is supposed to be. I’m not holding my breath given the current LCR Board Chair is a habitual donor to liberal Democrat politicians and causes.

Howdy from our nation’s capital! I couldn’t live blog last night, so I figured I’d put this report up for Wednesday morning.

Unfortunately, my travel from Charlotte started out poorly as the first flight was cancelled and the next one arrived too late for me to fully enjoy the Pajamas Media reception.

As I came into the room at the National Press Club, the first person I saw (and met) was none other than Jeff Gannon. I also spotted our favorite Conservative Blogger Diva – the lovely and vixen-ish Pamela from Atlas Shrugs! I sat right behind her but never got a chance to say hi. Sorry Pamela!

Other than the panelists, Jeff and Pamela were the only bloggers I recognized (and I was checking name tags the whole time). Moral of this part of the story: I need to read more of the blogs affiliated with Pajamas Media!

The panel discussion was very good focusing on the pros and cons of a highly partisan atmosphere in America. I tend to agree with Michael Barone (who as always cited voter turnout statistics like some people who know baseball stats) who pointed out that turnout in the 1996 Clinton re-election was its lowest in a generation. But the 2004 highly partisan election resulted in a 16% increase in votes for Kerry versus Gore 2000, and a 23% increase in votes for Bush 2004 versus Bush 2000 (now that is a stat I’d never heard before!)

The panel debated partisanship and bias within the blogging community and also the mainstream media outlets. Jane Hall was pretty defensive of the MSM while Cliff May and Paul Mirengoff trashed the traditional media.

Pajamas Media also has a survey going on their site to “name” those of us that have “blended” political views. As Glenn Reynolds said last night — “You can’t label me when I yearn for a world of legally married gay couples with assault weapons in their closets.”

Which makes me wonder — what do you all think? How partisan is too partisan? And do you think media outlets that have a obvious bias (*cough* New York Times *cough*) should fully disclose their political leanings?

Dan emailed to tell me that he is out of blogging-commission for a while.

Shortly after printing my papers for class, my computer crashed and I haven’t been able to reboot. Given that, I won’t be able to blog until I get it fixed–and have to check my e-mail at the school library.

Sometimes work travel and blogging synergize for me. This week is one case.

I’m on my way to Washington, DC this afternoon for a series of business meetings tomorrow. And it just so happens I’ll be able to attend a Pajamas Media panel discussion/reception tonight at the National Press Club. The topic: “How Partisan is Too Partisan?” Interesting to note that one of the original panelists was David Corn, but I see he is no longer on the list. I wonder if the disclosure of his role in the Plame-gate timewasting affair is the reason?

I assume we will be able to live-blog the event. If so, check back here after 6:30PM for updates from the inside!

I read this disgusting story in the Charlotte Observer’s Sunday paper. I couldn’t find the link to it there, but this is the same story as published online by the Wilmington Star News. Prepare to be outraged and on the verge of shock when reading this fawning, apologetic story about our enemies who have declared war on our nation.

It is hard to imagine that this is Mogadishu, the same Mogadishu of Black Hawk Down, and clan against clan and 15 years of unrelenting anarchy.

But over the past three months, the Islamists in control here have defied international expectations – in many ways. Not only have they done the unthinkable, pacifying one of the most dangerous cities in the world, they also seem to have moderated their message.

Instead of acting like the Taliban and ruthlessly imposing a harsh religious orthodoxy, as many feared, the Islamists seem to be trying to increase public support by softening their views, at least officially, delivering social services and pushing for democratic elections.

Islamic leaders are operating almost in campaign mode, organizing street cleanups, visiting hospitals, overseeing a mini building boom and recruiting elderly policemen to don faded uniforms they have not worn for years and return to work. Beyond that, they sent a letter this week to the U.N. Security Council pledging to support democratic rule.

“The world was so quick to label us,” said Ibrahim Hassan Addou, the foreign minister for the Islamic administration in Mogadishu. “All we are asking is to be judged on our deeds.”

Gee, it almost sounds like a CNN report from pre-2003 Baghdad. Remember, when CNN covered up the truth in order to “gain access” to the Saddam regime?

Well then let us judge their deeds. I wonder what Mr. Gettleman thinks of this development from his peace-loving Islamists………

Islamist fighters in the Somali port of Kismayo opened fire on Monday on residents who were burning tires, throwing stones and chanting to protest against the Islamist takeover of the city hours earlier.

A 13-year-old boy was shot dead while protesting, and two other people were injured as violence raged for several hours in Somalia’s third biggest city, witnesses said.

“We have been taken over by extremists, the Islamic courts have taken us by force, and now they are firing at us,” said protester Dahabo Dirie.

Riding in trucks with machine guns, the Islamists guarded main streets and forbade gatherings after the protests eased.

The Mogadishu-based Islamists poured into Kismayo overnight to extend their grip on south-central Somalia and effectively flank the powerless central government on three sides.

Ministers accused the Islamists of mounting the offensive with fighters from Eritrea, Pakistan and Yemen.

Never mind that American men and women are doing the same kind of reconstruction work in Iraq and Afghanistan — without the terror and 9th Century-era laws and punishment. But you will never as glowing a profile of our own American efforts from the MSM. Nah, the NYT is too busy looking for fluff pieces about a successful Islamic armed takeover of a country.

This is a great advertisement I saw on cable TV over the weekend. I literally stopped what I was doing because it caught my attention immediately. I first thought it was a guy running for office. Since the McCain-Feingold incumbent protection clause has gone into effect, I guess these are the only kinds of ads that third-party groups can run before Election Day.

I would think Bill Clinton is really cursing Al Gore right now for inventing the Internet. Clinton’s rash of lies in his meltdown with Chris Wallace are really coming back to haunt him as the actual facts of history emerge.

The debate in the blogosphere has moved to the topic of whether Clinton exploded in rage on purpose — as a rallying attempt for Democrats. If so, he should have been very careful about his loose use of factual evidence and his hyperbolic rantings about “right-wing conspiracies.”

CLINTON: It was a perfectly legitimate question but I want to know how many people in the Bush administration you asked this question of. I want to know how many people in the Bush administration you asked why didn’t you do anything about the Cole. I want to know how many you asked why did you fire Dick Clarke.

Wallace replied that such questions had been asked. Clinton replied: “I don’t believe you asked them that.”

I understand this is 20/20 hindsight, it’s more than an individual manhunt. I mean — what you ended up doing in the end was going after al Qaeda where it lived. . . . pre-9/11 should you have been thinking more about that?

What do you make of his [Richard Clarke's] basic charge that pre-9/11 that this government, the Bush administration largely ignored the threat from al Qaeda?

Mr. Secretary, it sure sounds like fighting terrorism was not a top priority.

Does the administration actually grasp the nature of the threat we face? Following the August 20 retaliatory strikes, secretary of state Madeleine Albright and national security adviser Samuel Berger rejected the predictable “wag the dog” accusations with solemn admonitions that, in terrorism, the United States has suddenly been confronted with a “new war” — one we would now have to be prepared to fight, alone if necessary. (GP Note: ALONE, if necessary!!! Berger and Albright. 1998. But now they want the world to love us. How hypocritical.)

This was exceedingly curious. There is nothing at all “new” about radical Islam’s terrorist war against the United States. It has been going on since the late 1980s. It has been openly declared since the 1993 attack on the World Trade Center in Manhattan, which killed six, injured over a thousand, and caused nearly $ 1 billion in damage. Its leaders, moreover, have been promising for more than five years that in pursuing this war, they would kill American civilians and bomb American military installations and embassies overseas….

Such an adversary will not be defeated by the techniques the president recommended at the U.N. — increased international cooperation in the prosecution and extradition of terrorists. These are necessary steps, but breathtakingly inadequate. A military threat calls for a military response….

In the main, international terrorism is a military problem, not a criminal-justice issue.

Two more Clinton lies from his conspiracy theory-driven FOX News meltdown are debunked. Was it really smart of Clinton to open up this can of worms?

I’ve been holding off on this posting since Labor Day. I didn’t want to get ahead of the curve. But I also couldn’t help remembering all summer that the predictions of the Dems’ “landslide” (aka 1994) were quite premature and very reminiscent of similar talk in the summer of 2002 and the summer of 2004.

You may recall those elections produced historic wins for a sitting President’s party, including the first President to garner over 50% of the vote since 1998. (Bill Clinton isn’t on that list).

But the evidence has grown to the point that it is hard for any rational (i.e. – non-Bush hating Liberal) to avoid it. The Democrats have squandered their best chance to take control of Congress since 1994 and I do believe — as I have felt all summer, actually — that the Republicans will hold both the House and Senate.

The Democrats’ yearlong lead among likely voters has evaporated, strengthening Republican chances of holding majority control in the House, according to the Gallup Poll.

Gallup’s latest survey of voters who say they will go to the polls Nov. 7 showed the contest is a “dead heat” between those who say they will vote Republican (48 percent) and those who say they intend to support Democrats (48 percent). The poll of 1,003 adults was conducted Sept. 15-17.

Democrats continue to maintain an advantage among registered voters; however, pollsters consider likely voters to be a more accurate measurement of the electorate’s preferences. The neck-and-neck estimates suggest the Republicans have the potential to offset the Democrats’ lead “with greater turnout,” Gallup said last week in an analysis of its findings.

“Should that result persist until Election Day, it suggests Republicans would be able to maintain their majority-party status in the House,” Gallup said.

The Congressional preference polls have also historically shown that they skew Democrat, and as long as the GOP is within 4 or 5 that really means they are ahead.

Prospects for the Dems to take control of the US Senate have always been weaker this year than for the House. The chances for a Senate control flip are getting even worse as we get closer to November 7. New Jersey and Maryland are seriously in play and most political observers say it would be near impossible for the Dems to take control of the Senate if they lose either.

Clinton has on occasion scolded other interviewers, most notably in a 2004 sitdown with ABC’s Peter Jennings, who drew this response after alluding to Clinton’s personal misconduct: “You don’t want to go here, Peter. . . . Not after what you people did and the way you, your network, what you did with Kenneth Starr. The way your people repeated every, little sleazy thing he leaked.”

This was all started, of course, by Mrs. Clinton (as First Lady) creating the phrase “vast-right wing conspiracy” on NBC’s “Today” program. Mrs. Clinton was defending her husband against “false” charges of having an affair with an intern (which in all other cases is also sexual harrassment). Her husband did nothing wrong! (she said). It was all a vast-right wing conspiracy. And once again, the language used by her and her husband are very similar.

“I do believe that this is a battle,” the first lady said.

“Look at the very people who are involved in this. They have popped up in other settings. The great story here for anybody willing to find it, write about it and explain it is this vast right-wing conspiracy that has been conspiring against my husband since the day he announced for president,” Mrs. Clinton said.

The first lady called the sex and perjury allegations swirling around her husband part of an effort “to undo the results of two elections.”

She was wrong to believe him, wasn’t she? Weren’t we all?

How interesting that Bill Clinton’s finger-wagging moments are never ever his fault. But everyone else. The neo-cons, the mysterious “right wing” conspiracy. ABC News. FOX News. Ken Starr. The CIA. The military.

I found it most interesting in Clinton’s breakdown with Chris Wallace that he said “I have never criticized President Bush.” Well, that is an outright lie. I sat there watching him explode and thinking: “How classless. I can’t imagine President Reagan acting like this. He looks more like Nixon.”

I can’t say I’m surprised by this report. Only NINE reporters are currently embedded with US forces in Iraq actually covering the War on Terror from the front lines. And four of the nine were reporters from Armed Forces news media.

Pajamas Media, in the course of a casual conversation with a Marine Corps information officer who tracks the number of embedded reporters in Iraq, learned the real number of embedded reporters covering the Iraq story on September 19, 2006. It was, according to the officer, a fairly typical day. To illustrate his point, he provided Pajamas Media with the illustration he uses to brief with on the state of media embedding in Iraq.

Here’s the chart (CLICK HERE TO VIEW) showing who the nine embedded reporters were covering all of Iraq on 9/19/2006. You’ll see that of those 9 reporters, 3 were from the Armed Forces’ Stars & Stripes, 1 from AFN (Armed Force Network), 1 from the Charlotte Observer, 1 from the BBC, 1 from the AP, 1 from RAI, and 1 from Polish Radio. All the rest of the “coverage” of the Iraq war on that day came from reporters hunkered down in the hotels and other locations under the rubric “Baghdad News Bureaus.”

The Charlotte Observer is the only American newspaper (local or national) that has reporters embedded in Iraq covering the real news. Where is the New York Times? USA Today? Washington Post? LA Times? Hiding in their hotel rooms in Baghdad.

No wonder we aren’t getting a full and truthful picture from Iraq. These “professional journalists” aren’t doing their jobs and are violating their public duty to give us the truth.

As a gay liberal NRO-reader, thank you for the superbly sensiscal column on Governor McGreevey. The man’s a schmuck, and a schmuck on a publicity blitz at that. But don’t hold your breath waiting for much condemnation from mainstream gay organizations. Most voting gays know only that McGreevey came out and are unfamiliar with the Governor’s, ah, unique regard for the law. Meanwhile, certain swaths of the web-using left* have tagged McGreevey as a good guy. Educating the gay community is expensive, time-consuming work, and talking sense into the lefty blogosphere is a theoretical proposition, so why would the HRC or anyone else waste time on this, especially in an election year? In other words, “McGreevey who?”

I don’t even mind the political calculus. That I understand. But this guy’s going to make more money than Lily Tomlin this year, no matter who does more good for homosexuals and humanity in general. I don’t know how to square that with a just and loving God.

Peace,
J.

* These are the people who think anything written on NRO is ipso facto batsh*t crazy, that Martin Peretz is Mata Hari sans boobies, and aren’t nearly as much fun at parties as they like to think.

Now this guy is funny! Sounds like a well-educated GayPatriot reader to me!

It seems that whenever I am doing cardio at the gym and look up at the TV to see political commercials, I’ll see one showing my man Ahnuld speaking while my man George W smiles in the background. I do see some words critical of the Bush Administration on screen, but nothing about Governor Schwarzenegger’s decent record. I guess it might be different if I could hear the sound.

These ads, produced by the California Democratic party, are designed to benefit their candidate, a guy named Phil Angelides, in this fall’s gubernatorial race by playing on the president’s low poll numbers in the Golden State. So consumed are Golden State Democrats with hatred for President Bush that they’re convinced that when Californians are made aware of Schwarzenegger’s support for the president, they’ll turn away from him in droves.

Well, it looks like the Democrats’ ads are really hitting home. The average of the last five polls has my man Ahnuld up by 12 points, with one poll giving him a 23 point lead. (H/t: TKS.)

“At least I tried. That’s the difference between me and some, including all the right wingers. They ridicule me for trying. They had eight months to try, they did not try. I tried. So I tried and failed…”

You can watch all of his personal meltdown on FOX News Sunday tomorrow.

My two cents: How does eight months even compare with eight years of failure and repeated al-Qaeda attacks on American targets between 1993 and 2000, including the World Trade Center?

Whereas we all saw our fellow Americans savagely die in innocence on 9/11/2001, this man only saw his chances for legacy crumble that day. We all have our priorities.

“Now if you want to criticize me for one thing, you can criticize me for this: after the Cole, I had battle plans drawn to go into Afghanistan, overthrow the Taliban and launch a full-scale attack search for bin Laden. But we needed basing rights in Uzbekistan — which we got after 9/11,” Clinton said.

The former president complained at the time the CIA and FBI refused to certify bin Laden was responsible for the USS Cole attack.

“While I was there, they refused to certify. So that meant I would have had to send a few hundred special forces in helicopters, refuel at night,” he said.

Keep in mind, al-Qaeda had already attacked the WTC, Khobar Towers, killed soliders in Somalia, and bin Laden had declared war on America — all before the Cole attack. But he suddenly wakes up “after the Cole”??

The part I really love is the final sentence in the box. The translation of “I would have had to send a few hundred special forces in helicopters, refuel at night” goes something like this: I DID NOT WANT TO BE ANOTHER JIMMY CARTER AND AL GORE WAS RUNNING FOR PRESIDENT.

I have forwarded your report to 2 of our Operations Managers for investigation and follow up. I have asked them to obtain statements and, if still available, to view surveillance videos. Although the video quality is often poor, the time at the checkpoint will be telling. I have also sent this on to our training group for use in their sessions on professionalism and courtesy.

Although I am out of the office until 9/26 I wanted to respond, if only in a preliminary manner. The type of behavior you describe is not acceptable and if it is discovered that an Officer has a penchant for this level of performance it will have an adverse effect on their employment status.

I appreciate your sentiments about security and I want to assure you that a report like this will be taken seriously. With few exceptions, our Officers are professional, courteous, and committed to their mission. In most instances it is peer pressure that maintains a high level of performance and misbehavior is not tolerated within a team anywhere in the system.

I regret any distress you experienced as a result of this screening and we will do all we can to make sure there is not a repeat performance.

Bob Kapp

Now why had I heard nothing from him or anyone else I copied on my email for over a week….until I went all “GayPatriot” on them yesterday? Why does it always have to come to extremes in order to get adequate customer service these days? Just damn frustrating, I tell ya.